Wednesday, July 06, 2011

A Few Items

Duke has just announced a new batch of trustees, including a judge on the 4th circuit--Allyson Duncan (Duke Law '75). The appointment presumably will require a double recusal--not only will Duncan need to recuse herself from any and all lacrosse case appeals, but I would assume she'd have to recuse herself, within the BOT itself, from any and all discussions of the lacrosse case. She was a Bush nominee.

Commenting on the DSK case in the Washington Post, Paul Farhi notes how the mainstream media has refused to name his accuser--even as she files a lawsuit against the New York Post. Alan Dershowitz (correctly) comments on the unfairness of this approach, and the article also (correctly) observes how, in an internet era, accusers' names can generally be easily found, making the anonymity policy even less defensible.

And then there's this absurd analysis from June Cross, in The Root: "Even in 2011, it seems, black women who accuse powerful men of rape have to lead lives above reproach. The Duke University lacrosse-team rape case from 2006, and the St. John's College case before that, bear witness to what happens when a young black woman of questionable repute charges rape against privileged men. But the life circumstances of marginalized women force them to make different life choices.

Crystal Mangum's problem wasn't her "marginalized" status--it was the fact that the physical evidence, in myriad ways, contradicted each and every one of her various tall tales.

Finally, the incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal praises Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance for his willingness to reconsider the DSK case in light of the accuser's credibility falling apart. She correctly notes that Vance's open-mindedness came as "no small shock in a society accustomed to prosecutors whose instant response to the discovery of facts that undermine their case is to dig in all the more aggressively—recall the Duke University lacrosse case, or the notorious child abuse cases of the 1980s—with assurances that the case against the accused is stronger than ever."

13 comments:

Bünzli
said...

"[...]praises Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance for his willingness to reconsider the DSK case in light of the accuser's credibility falling apart."

Good for Vance. Of course in this case the prosecution faced a defendant whose resources matched their own. Strauss-Kahn was in the position to spend millions on lawyers, private investigators etc. The prosecution knew that any damaging information about the accuser would almost certainly have been discovered by DSKs defense team.

Somehow i doubt the state would have been as diligent with its duties under Brady if the defendant was some working stiff with a public defender.

but byadding a local grauate judge who would have decided on the case, HASNT DUKE bot advice that she might pass along to them...simply being able to avoid VOTING on anything related to the students barbacue doesnt prevent her from offering advice that the students are prevented from receiving ?

just another way that the BIG CORPORATION and Foundations at Duke seek ways to gain an unfair advantage...

but the truth cant be supressed forever...the law isnt the ass that Duke mocks

There is another case in the news, two New York City police officers accused of and then acquitted of raping a woman they were supposed to be helping. They were convicted of misdemeanor charges which amounted to conduct totally unbecoming of police officers(my words). Google "NY Police acquitted of rape" to get the story. These men did disgrace the NYC Police department.

The issue in the rape case was, the crime scene was examined for forensic evidence and there was no forensic evidence of any intimate sexual contact between the accused and the alleged victim. I would say, the feminist attitude was, forensic evidence, or the lack thereof be d----d, the only thing that should have been considered was the word of the alleged victim.

Unfortunately, the word of the victim has been shown to be unreliable. I am not referring to people like Tawana Brawley or Crystal Mangum. I refer to cases like that of Timothy Cole or Darrell Hunt who were convicted on the word of the victim. Unfortunately the victim in each case mistakenly identified an innocent man as a rapist.

In addition we have the woman who falsely accused Michael Flatley of rape, the woman who falsely accused David Copperfield of rape. Feminists have asked, why would a woman falsely accuse a man of rape. In ieach of those cases, the motive was money. Each of the alleged "victims" hoped to get a big settlement by filing civil charges.

The Justice system really needs to examine itself as to how it deals with rape allegations.

FYI, "NPR Topics: Story of the Day Podcast" for today is on the "Science of the Lineup". Here's the description.

"Psychologists have long worried that traditional police procedures for photo lineups land many innocent people in jail. Last month, Texas joined nine other states that have passed measures requiring police departments to review and reform their eyewitnes..."

The June Cross reference to "the St. John's College case" is mistaken. St. John's College, as opposed to St. John's University, where the case to which Cross alludes arose, is an intellectually rigorous school with campuses in Annapolis, MD and Santa Fe, NM, and with no such history.

Dorothy Rabinowitz the journalist is truly incomparable. I have read quite a few of her investigative stories over the years. I have lamented (and continue to lament) the failure of so many of her journalistic colleagues to emulate her reverence for the facts and the rigor of her analysis of the facts. Of course, most could not match her intellectual firepower or her skill with language. But she stands out as a shining example of how journalists should do their jobs.

feminist attitude was, forensic evidence, or the lack thereof be d----d, the only thing that should have been considered was the word of the alleged victim even if that victim is a notorious liar like Brwanley, Mangum, Hill or Diallo.

Latest news from Europe is that the 32 year old journalist who did not press charges on the advice of her mother who is .... a former DSK lover.

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review